Welcome to the BDSM Library.
  • Login:
beymenslotgir.com kalebet34.net escort bodrum bodrum escort
Results 1 to 30 of 76

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    75
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by mkemse View Post
    And if Al Quida was in fact "hiding out" in Iraq before we invaded, as much distrust and dislike as Saddam had or Al Quida he would have had them rooted out by his military
    Saddams main Terrorists intrestes were support those who wanted to attack Israel he supported Hamas, Hezbola (excuse me if my spelling is wrong on their names) and similar organizations who main enemey was Israel and their destruction
    There is an arabic proverb "The enemy of my enemy is my friend". Given that the US is seen by many Iraqis to be an enemy it's no surprise Iraq is now a fertile recruiting field for Al Qaeda.

    Saddam would never support Al Qaeda for the simple reason it promotes theocracy which would threaten Saddam's position as a secular leader.

  2. #2
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    2,311
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Moonraker View Post
    There is an arabic proverb "The enemy of my enemy is my friend". Given that the US is seen by many Iraqis to be an enemy it's no surprise Iraq is now a fertile recruiting field for Al Qaeda.

    Saddam would never support Al Qaeda for the simple reason it promotes theocracy which would threaten Saddam's position as a secular leader.
    Thank you, that is why I posted to remark from an article on the Web, the "Aledged" links to Al Quida is just one of many reasons Bush used to invade Iraq and that as well as the supposed WMD's which were proven not to exist either, again a case of "Faulty Intelligence" and when you go to War you need to know who your enemey is and what thieir strengths and weakness are to fight a succefull War you do not invade a country on assumption you invade if you do based on documented fact, and most important you MUST verify your Intelliegence, not just assume it is correct, you have to know it is

    "Well, they looked like portable weapons labs, so we assumed they were" not real good logic there

    "Hey, it looks like rain or snow is comnig" well let's see if it does before we send salt rucks out and as the sky'sa get darker and snow starts to fluury down, then you start the salting, because then you know it is going to snow

    And there are some who have said Bush would have ised any excuse in the world to Invade Iraq once he had his ind set on doing so whic he did, History now speaks for itself

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    75
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by mkemse View Post
    Thank you, that is why I posted to remark from an article on the Web, the "Aledged" links to Al Quida is just one of many reasons Bush used to invade Iraq and that as well as the supposed WMD's which were proven not to exist either, again a case of "Faulty Intelligence" and when you go to War you need to know who your enemey is and what thieir strengths and weakness are to fight a succefull War you do not invade a country on assumption you invade if you do based on documented fact, and most important you MUST verify your Intelliegence, not just assume it is correct, you have to know it is
    I am not disagreeing with you merely supporting your view. Everybody agrees that political decisions should be based on the available intelligence and that in this case the decision had already been made (according to reports well before 911) and intelligence was manipulated to justify that decision. Cart before horse if you will.

    In the UK it was the same (coincidence we ask) we had the "Dodgy Dossier" which built the case for war on dubious facts and outright lies such that intelligence officers refused to put their names to it and one even commited suicide as a result. (sceptics think how convenient for the government)

  4. #4
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    2,311
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Moonraker View Post
    I am not disagreeing with you merely supporting your view. Everybody agrees that political decisions should be based on the available intelligence and that in this case the decision had already been made (according to reports well before 911) and intelligence was manipulated to justify that decision. Cart before horse if you will.

    In the UK it was the same (coincidence we ask) we had the "Dodgy Dossier" which built the case for war on dubious facts and outright lies such that intelligence officers refused to put their names to it and one even commited suicide as a result. (sceptics think how convenient for the government)
    thanks

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Members who have read this thread: 0

There are no members to list at the moment.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Back to top